Posting Calories on Menus

[zenkai]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/us...staurants.html

I can't wait for this to happen and this is a good idea! I try to eat the best I can when I eat out, I often have to email local places to get their nutrition info so I know what I can and shouldn't eat. Common sense helps a lot of course but when you keep a record of your calories it's hard when you don't know what you are eating! It needs to include sugar too, I try to keep my sugar intake below 15g which is damn near impossible at times.

Sadly the only restaurant I see following this rule preemptively is McDonalds

WASHINGTON — The Food and Drug Administration announced sweeping rules on Tuesday that will require chain restaurants, movie theaters and pizza parlors across the country to post calorie counts on their menus. Health experts said the new requirements would help combat the country’s obesity epidemic by showing Americans just how many calories lurk in their favorite foods.

[Spraxle]

Having easy to access caloric info on your food is really helpful. Though figuring out the calories on stuff in a sit down restaurant can be a bit of a pita for the staff I would think. I hadn't eaten at McDonalds in a while and the other night I wanted a shitty burger so I went into one and they had the calories posted next to each item. Helped me know what I could get to fill out the rest of my calories for the day.

[Crissi]

I'm for this as well. Seeing calorie counts help deter me from things I'd like but are too much in calories. Have a strict limit if 1200 a day so knowing how much I've had helps keep me to that.

[Kujako]

I like places that already list this information (Habbit burgers for example). There are some things that make you do a double take when you see that they have twice the calories of other menu items.

Of course, it means the end of "Outback Fries", these bad boys are almost 2,000 calories.

[Armbre]

I think its a great idea mcdonalds where i live do that which maybe is why their sales are down.. i know everytime i see the calorie counts i shift away from the 2000 range stuff look for 300-400 style stuff

[Independent voter]

They need to stop dividing the item by servings too. They say things like "only 400 calories!" when there are 12 servings in the box and people typically eat the whole box. Or their idea of a serving is a tablespoon's worth when nobody eats that way.

[Kujako]

They need to stop dividing the item by servings too. They say things like "only 400 calories!" when there are 12 servings in the box and people typically eat the whole box. Or their idea of a serving is a tablespoon's worth when nobody eats that way.

and to add to my calorie reporting pet peeves. Zero calorie should mean exactly that, not "10 calories or less per serving".

[Crissi]

They need to stop dividing the item by servings too. They say things like "only 400 calories!" when there are 12 servings in the box and people typically eat the whole box. Or their idea of a serving is a tablespoon's worth when nobody eats that way.

Pop tart are the worst for this. 1 serving is 1 pop tart but they wrap 2 together and the 2nd gets stale if you leave it in the box.

[Deleted]

In Finland there's the expectation that people can do math, as we are given full nutritional info per 100 grams. Then you need to look at the package size and figure out how many grams that is, and then figure out one "serving" weight. Although, sometimes there's an additional "per serving" column. However, the per 100 grams is much better if you truly want to figure out how much stuff is in the amount you're eating. Of course it's 100 ml when speaking of fluids, although sometimes there are some packages that come in ml but have a per 100 gram info, so that gets interesting. But, as I said, expectation of fluency in mathematics.

Also, calories tell you very, very little, if you ignore all the other nutritional information.

[Kujako]

In Finland there's the expectation that people can do math

Here in america, we were testing poorly on math skills so we dropped it as a requirement! USA, USA, USA!

[Crissi]

Here in america, we were testing poorly on math skills so we dropped it as a requirement! USA, USA, USA!

I don't want to have to do math when I eat dang it. Entirely too much work. And I love doing math, but just not when I eat beyond " ok, this is x calories and I have a y limit"

[Deleted]

I'm for this as well. Seeing calorie counts help deter me from things I'd like but are too much in calories. Have a strict limit if 1200 a day so knowing how much I've had helps keep me to that.

1200 you want to go bankrupt? :X

[Kujako]

I don't want to have to do math when I eat dang it. Entirely too much work. And I love doing math, but just not when I eat beyond " ok, this is x calories and I have a y limit"

It's not really about doing math. Just don't eat anything that's in the quadruple digit calories.

[owbu]

Studies seem to show that it doesnt really change peoples behaviour, but I would like them to do it anyways, just so that people who do care can pick meals they want/need.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXMts38a3rc

[Kujako]

Studies seem to show that it doesnt really change peoples behaviour

It changes mine, and I'm selfish, so that's all I care about!

[Bearshield]

I could care less how many calories are in food at restaurants. I don't go out to eat every day, and I often don't finish my meal when I do. People need to realize that you don't have to completely eliminate food from your diet to be a healthy weight, you just need to eat in moderation and get off your butt.

[Crissi]

1200 you want to go bankrupt? :X

For my height and age, 1200 to 1300 results in a 1lb a week weight loss so I'll be fine

[Kujako]

For my height and age, 1200 to 1300 results in a 1lb a week weight loss so I'll be fine

Depends on the amount you burn...

[Deleted]

Depends on the amount you burn...

No it does not.

She cant really gain with that under normal circumstances.

[araine]

In Finland there's the expectation that people can do math, as we are given full nutritional info per 100 grams. Then you need to look at the package size and figure out how many grams that is, and then figure out one "serving" weight. Although, sometimes there's an additional "per serving" column. However, the per 100 grams is much better if you truly want to figure out how much stuff is in the amount you're eating. Of course it's 100 ml when speaking of fluids, although sometimes there are some packages that come in ml but have a per 100 gram info, so that gets interesting. But, as I said, expectation of fluency in mathematics.

Also, calories tell you very, very little, if you ignore all the other nutritional information.

This is how it should be done. But if you do it this way you cant trick people into thinking peanut butter is a low calorie food since it only contains lets say 35 calories per serving and the serving is a teaspoon but you put on a couple tablespoons so infact that 35 calorie serving is actually 200 calories or so .

But yes nutritional values should be posted on menus and if you have oversized portions etc it should be included in the total count. dont expect to get away with but our plate is so big that we only expect you to eat 1/2 of it so we only list half of the value.

But the per 100 gram is not a good measure to leave as the lone marker for restaurant food we need to be tied to each plate of food leaving the kitchen if a food is 400 calories/ 100 gram but your serving coming out is a 2000 calorie bomb the consumer needs to know that it is a 2000 calorie bomb and as such should never ever be ordered.